rence which a son oweth to his father? Do we strive to obey him with a faithful and unreserved and universal obedience, and SO present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is our reasonable service?"

66

II. It is an easy and obvious transition from the first criterion, by which we examined the claim of Joseph to be considered as “a man in whom was the Spirit of God," namely "his love of God," to the second criterion, namely his " love of man.” For our blessed Lord, who declares" the love of God to be the first and great commandment," enforces the love of our neighbour by similar obligations; and his beloved disciple pronounces in the true spirit of the Gospel and of his "meek and lowly" Master, that where the love of man is not, the love of God cannot be ".

Let us proceed then to inquire, whether we are actuated by the Spirit of God, by applying to our own condition the parti

cular remarks, that have been made on the moral and social character of Joseph.

1. The first law of nature, which respects our conduct to others, is that which prescribes affection and reverence from children towards their parents and it is in compliance with those feelings, which almighty God naturally implanted in the heart of man, that He was pleased to make the same the first moral law in his revealed will to his favoured people, and especially (as St. Paul describes it) "the first commandment with promise ;"-the first commandment, to the performance of which he hath graciously annexed the promise of a blessing. For his exemplary observance of this commandment, the Patriarch, whose character we are examining, was memorably and illustriously distinguished. Is our conduct to the authors of our being, affectionate and dutiful as his? Do we take that earnest interest in their welfare? we minister to their wants, and contribute to their comforts?

Do

Do we succour them

with our fortunes, and attend on them with our persons? Do we love and honour them in their lives, do we solace them in their declining years, and do we "embalm" their memories when they are dead? In the present age, pretending as it does to superior degrees of illumination, it is much to be doubted whether filial piety, whether the honour due from children to parents, maintains its just rank in the scale of moral obligation. We have seen the rank assigned to it in the divine law: let us see how, agreeably to that station, it is spoken of by the wisest of men. "The fear of the Lord," saith Solomon," is the beginning of knowledge; but fools despise wisdom and instruction d." This is his first maxim for the regulation of human life, originating, where all sound instruction must originate, with the religious principle. What is his second maxim? "My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother: bind them continually upon thine heart, and tie them about thy neck. When thou goest, it shall lead thee; when thou sleepest, it shall keep thee; and

* Prov. i. 7.

Is

when thou awakest, it shall talk with thee. It shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy necke." such our reverence for the earthly authors of our being; is such our obedience to that," which is the first commandment with promise?" or dare we defy the "curse" denounced by the Lord God upon him, "who setteth light by his father or his mother f?"

2. Together with the most exemplary filial piety, we have seen Joseph distinguished by the warmest affection towards his brothers. A sense of the most unmerited and severest injuries experienced from them, had not been able to stifle his benevolence, and did not prevent him from manifesting the dictates of that benevolence in the most substantial and valuable services. Is such our affection, our good-will to our brethren, to our "kinsmen according to the flesh?" But not only so we are all brethren: "hath not one God created us?" hath not one Saviour

f

Prov. i. 8. vi. 20, 21, 22. Deut. xxvii. 16. • Mal. ii. 10.

redeemed us? Do we then all "love as brethren?" Do we as "brethren, dwell together in unity i?" Do we 66 put away from us all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, with all malice? And are we kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven usk?" Can we Can we "bless them that curse

us? can we do good to them that hate us, and pray for them which despitefully use us and persecute us1?" "If our enemy hunger, can we feed him? if he thirst, can we give him drink? Instead of being overcome of evil, do we evil with good m?”

endeavour to overcome

Sirs ye are brethren," said Moses to two of the Israelites, as they strove together; "why do ye wrong one to another?" The principle, in its literal application, regarding the Jews as a distinct people, "children of the blood of Abraham," ran through the whole of their laws: in its enlarged signification, under the notion which the Gospel holds forth, that all men are children of God, that all men are